Methods for compositional analysis of downhole fluids using data from nmr and other tools

ABSTRACT

Methods and apparatuses are provided for analyzing a composition of a hydrocarbon-containing fluid. The methods include using a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) tool to conduct NMR measurements on the hydrocarbon-containing fluid to obtain NMR data. A non-NMR tool, such as an optical tool, is used to conduct additional measurements and to obtain non-NMR data on the fluid. The methods further include determining an indication of the composition of the fluid by using the NMR data and normalizing the indication of the composition of the fluid using the non-NMR data.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This Application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No.14/109,447 and 14/109,354, both entitled “Methods for CompositionalAnalysis of Downhole Fluids Using Data from NMR and Other Tools” andfiled on Dec. 17, 2013 (Attorney Docket Numbers IS 11.0637-US-NP and IS12.3254-US-NP), which are hereby incorporated by reference in theirentirety herein.

FIELD

The subject disclosure generally relates to hydrocarbon-bearinggeological formations. More particularly, the subject disclosure relatesto methods for analyzing the compositional analysis of downhole fluidsusing nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and other data from downholetools.

BACKGROUND

Optical (spectral) data from downhole fluid analysis logging tools arecurrently being used to determine the composition of crude oilsdownhole. See, e.g., Fujisawa, G., et al., “Near-infrared CompositionalAnalysis of Gas and Condensate Reservoir Fluids at Elevated Pressuresand Temperatures,” Applied Spectroscopy, 52(12: 1615-1620 (2002);Fujisawa, G. et al., “Analyzing Reservoir Fluid Composition In-Situ inReal Time: Case Study in a Carbonate Reservoir”, SPE 84092, AnnualTechnical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colo. (2002) which are bothhereby incorporated by reference herein in their entireties. Thesedeterminations are restricted to a subset of components orpseudocomponents including C₁ (methane) to C₅ (pentane), such as C₁,C₂-C₅, and also C₆₊. The optical tools measure the optical densities{OD} at a set of wavelengths λ_(i). These are then used to determine theweight percent w_(cj) of components and pseudocomponents such as C₁,C₂-C₅ and C₆₊, or C₁, C₂, C₃-C₅ and C₆₊. The individual weight percentsfor C₂, C₃, C₄, and C₅ can then be further resolved using a delumpingalgorithm. For some of the optical tools, the amount of water andcarbon-dioxide (CO₂) can also be determined. In addition, the opticaldensity can be used to obtain information about asphaltenes and resins.See, e.g., Mullins, O. C., et al., “The Colloidal Structure of CrudeOils and the Structure of Reservoirs,” Energy Fuels, 21:2785-2794 (2007)which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.

NMR relaxation and diffusion data can also be used to determine oilcomposition. From this data, the average chain length and the chainlength distribution can be obtained. See, e.g., Freed, D. E., et al.,“Scaling Laws for Diffusion Coefficients in Mixtures of Alkanes,” Phys.Rev. Lett., 94:067602 (2005); Freed, D. E., “Dependence on Chain Lengthof NMR Relaxation Times in Mixtures of Alkanes,” J. Chem. Phys.,126:174502 (2007); Hurlimann, M. D. et al., “Hydrocarbon Compositionfrom NMR Diffusion and Relaxation Data,” SPWLA, 49^(th) Annual LoggingSymposium (May 2008); U.S. Pat. No. 6,859,032 to Heaton, N.J., andFreedman, R.; Anand, V. and Freedman, R., “New Methods for PredictingProperties of Live Oils from NMR,” SPWLA, Paper AAAA Proceedings of the2009 Annual SPWLA Symposium (2009), which are all incorporated byreference herein in their entireties. In addition the comparison oftransverse and longitudinal relaxation times and/or diffusion can givesome information about asphaltenes, and the shapes of the distributionscan be a signal of highly biodegraded oils. See, e.g., Mutina, A. R.,and Hurlimann, M. D., “Correlation of Transverse and RotationalDiffusion Coefficient: A Probe of Chemical Composition in HydrocarbonOils,” J. Phys. Chem., A 112:3291-3301 (2008); Freed, D. E., andHurlimann, M. D., “One- and Two-Dimensional Spin Correlation of ComplexFluids and the Relation to Fluid Composition,” C. R. Phys., 11:181-191(2010), which are both hereby incorporated by reference herein in theirentireties. Furthermore, the measurement of the NMR relaxationdispersion, i.e., the relaxation profile as a function of the appliedmagnetic field, can yield additional information about the aggregationpropensity of the asphaltenes and resins in the crude oil.

NMR relaxation and diffusion measurements can be made with a downholefluid analysis logging tool. See, Kleinberg, R. L., “Well logging”,Encyclopedia of Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, John Wiley (1996), which ishereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. The NMR toolsmeasure the magnetization M_(i) at a series of echo times t_(i). Theycan also measure the magnetization as a function of wait times τ_(i) oras a function of b_(i), which is a diffusion weighting parameterdetermined by gradients and time variables. The tool data, such as{M_(i), t_(i)}, {M_(i), τ_(i)}, or {M_(i), b_(i)} are used to determinethe transverse or longitudinal relaxation time distributions or thediffusion distributions, given by {ƒ_(j),T_(2j)}, {ƒ_(j),T_(1j)}, or{ƒ_(j),D_(j)}, respectively. For these distributions, ƒ_(j) is thefraction of protons with relaxation time T_(2j) or T_(1j) or withdiffusion coefficient D_(j), weighted by the total magnetization, M₀.These distributions can be related to the raw data by an inversionprocess, such as an inverse Laplace transform. See, Fordham, E. J. etal., “Imaging multiexponential relaxation in the (y, log_(d)T₁) plane,with application to clay filtration rock cores,” J. Magn, Reson, A,113:139-150 (1995); Venkataramanan, L. et al., “Solving fredholmintegrals of the first kind with tensor product structure in 2 and 2.5dimensions,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process, 50:1017-1026 (2002), which areboth hereby incorporated by reference herein in their entireties.However, this inverse Laplace transform can be problematic because whennoise is present, the inversion is non-unique. As a result, a regulatoris often introduced to ensure the smoothness of the calculateddistributions. These issues introduce some uncertainty into thecalculated relaxation and diffusion distributions. See, Epstein, C. L.,and Schotland, J., “The bad truth about Laplace's transform,” SIAM Rev.,50:504-520 (2008), which is hereby incorporated by reference herein inits entirety.

To obtain the relaxation or diffusion distribution from the raw data,the quantity ∥d−Kƒ∥² is minimized with the constraint that ƒ_(j), thecomponents of the vector ƒ, are non-negative. In this expression, d isthe vector with components d_(i)=M_(i), and κ is the kernel. Forstandard measurements, it is given by K_(ij)=exp(t_(i)/T_(2j)),1-2exp(−t_(i)/T_(1j)) and exp(−b_(i)D_(j)) for the transverserelaxation, longitudinal relaxation and diffusion, respectively. In thepast, the above expression is minimized using methods such as anon-negative least square fit with Tikhonov regularization or by maximumentropy methods.

Once the relaxation or diffusion distributions are known, the NMR datacan be used to obtain information about chain length distributions andthe viscosity of the oil. The viscosity η of the oil is related to the−1st moment of the diffusion coefficient. See, Freed, D. E., et al.,“Scaling laws for diffusion coefficients in mixtures of alkanes,” PhysRev Lett. 94:067602 (2005) and Hurlimann, M. D. et al., “Hydrocarboncomposition from NMR diffusion and relaxation data,” SPLWA, 49^(th)Annual Logging Symposium (May 2008). In terms of the log distribution,ƒ_(D) (log D_(i)), the viscosity is given by

$\begin{matrix}{{\eta = {{CT}\frac{\int{{{f_{D}\left( {\log \; D_{i}} \right)}/D_{i}}{{\log \left( D_{i} \right)}}}}{\int{{f_{D}\left( {\log \; D_{i}} \right)}{{\log \left( D_{i} \right)}}}}}},} & (1)\end{matrix}$

where the temperature T is in degrees Kelvin and C has been found to be3.2×10⁻⁸cpcn²sK, but can vary somewhat depending on the type of oil. Fornumerical calculations, the integrals in Eq. (1) are replaced withsummations. There are also correlations between viscosity and the meanlog diffusion coefficient or relaxation time which appear in theliterature. See, e.g., Morriss, C. E., et al., “Hydrocarbon saturationand viscosity estimation from NMR logging in the Beldridge diatomite,”The Log Analyst, 382:44-59 (1996); Kleinberg, R. L., and Vinegar, H. J.,“NMR properties or reservoir fluids,” The Log Analyst, 376:20-32 (1996);Lo, S., et al., “Correlations of NMR relaxation time with viscosity,diffusivity, and gasoil ratio of methanehydrocarbon mixtures,”Proceedings of the 2000 Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,Society of Petroleum Engineers (October, 2000); Straley, C.,“Reassessment of correlations between viscosity and NMR measurements,”SPWLA, 47^(th) Annual Logging Symposium (June 2006) which are all herebyincorporated by reference herein in their entireties.

Several methods have been proposed to relate NMR relaxation anddiffusion to chain length distributions. One method makes use of radialbasis functions to interpolate between known data and new measurements.See, Anand, V., and Freedman, R., “New methods for predicting propertiesof live oils from NMR,” Paper AAAA Proceedings of the 2009 Annual SPWLASymposium (2009). Another method uses the constituent viscosity model torelate the diffusion coefficients and relaxation times of each componentto its microscopic, or constituent, viscosity. See, previouslyincorporated U.S. Pat. No. 6,859,032. A third method as discussed belowis based on looking at mixtures of alkanes, but can apply to oils withother components also.

For the method based on looking at mixtures of alkanes, the averagechain length or carbon number (the terms “chain length” and “carbonnumber” being used interchangeably herein) is defined as N=Σx_(j)N_(j),where x_(j) is the mole percent of molecules with chain length N_(j).For oils high in saturates, this average chain length is related to the1/v^(th) moment of the diffusion distribution and, in the absence ofasphaltene, to the 1/κ^(th) moment of the relaxation time distribution,where v=0.7, and κ=1.24. They are given by Freed, D. E., et al.,“Scaling laws for diffusion coefficients in mixtures of alkanes,” PhysRev Lett. 94:067602 (2005), and Freed, D. E., “Dependence on chainlength of NMR relaxation times in mixtures of alkanes,” J. Chem, Phys.,126:174502 (2007):

$\begin{matrix}{{\overset{\_}{N} = {A^{\frac{1}{\beta + v}}{\langle D^{1/v}\rangle}^{\frac{- v}{\beta + v}}}},{and}} & (2) \\{\overset{\_}{N} = {B^{\frac{1}{\gamma + \kappa}}{{\langle T_{1,2}^{1/\kappa}\rangle}^{- \frac{\kappa}{\gamma + \kappa}}.}}} & (3)\end{matrix}$

In these equations, A and B are constants that depend on temperature andpressure, and β and γ are constants that depend on temperature. Thechain length N_(i) that corresponds to the diffusion coefficient D_(i)is then given by previously incorporated Freed, D. E., et al., “Scalinglaws for diffusion coefficients in mixtures of alkanes,” Phys Rev Lett.94:067602 (2005),

N _(i) =A ^(1/v) N ^(−β/v) D _(i) ^(−1/v)  (4)

For chain lengths less than about five, this expression should bemodified, because, in that case, the molecules act more like hardspheres than chains. Similarly, in the absence of asphaltenes, the chainlength that corresponds to the relaxation time is given_(2i) bypreviously incorporated Freed, D. E., “Dependence on chain length of NMRrelaxation times in mixtures of alkanes,” J. Chem, Phys., 126:174502(2007),

N _(i) =B ^(1/κ) N ^(−γ/κ) T _(1,2i) ^(−1/κ)  (5)

It should be appreciated that equation (5) is not valid for dissolvedgases, such as methane and ethane, because they relax by differentprocesses than the longer molecules. If the diffusion or relaxationdistribution was determined as function of log D_(i) or log log T_(1,2i)with the log D_(i) or log T_(1,2i) evenly spaced, then the logdistribution for the proton fraction of spins on molecules with chainlength N_(i) is given by

ƒ_(N)(log N _(i))=vƒ _(D)(log D _(i)),  (6)

ƒ_(N)(log N _(i))=κƒ_(T)(log T _(1,2i)),  (7)

respectively. The weight fraction, on a log scale, is then given by

$\begin{matrix}{{w\left( {\log \; N_{i}} \right)} = {\frac{\left\lbrack {\left( {{7N_{i}} + 1} \right)/\left( {N_{i} + 1} \right)} \right\rbrack {f_{N}\left( {\log \; N_{i}} \right)}}{\int{\left\lbrack {\left( {{7N_{j}} + 1} \right)/\left( {N_{j} + 1} \right)} \right\rbrack {f_{N}\left( {\log \; N_{j}} \right)}{{\log \left( N_{j} \right)}}}}.}} & (8)\end{matrix}$

In this equation, it is assumed that a molecule with N, carbon atoms has2N_(i)+2 protons. Then, on a linear scale, the weight fraction ofmolecules with chain length N_(i) is given by

w _(i) =w(log N _(i))/N _(i)  (9)

It should be appreciated that equations (2) through (5) set forth abovefor chain length and mean chain length as a function of diffusioncoefficients and relaxation times may be derived from the observationthat, for oils high in saturates, the diffusion coefficient have theform

D _(i) =A N ^(−β) N _(i) ^(−v)  (10)

and similarly for relaxation times. For small molecules such as methaneand ethane, the quantity N_(i) ^(v) in Eq. (10) is modified because themolecules no longer act like chain molecules. For methane, it isreplaced with 1.64, and for ethane, it is replaced with 2.73. See,Freed, D. E., et al., “Scaling laws for diffusion coefficients inmixtures of alkanes,” Phys Rev Lett. 94:067602 (2005). In this way, theNMR relaxation and diffusion distributions can give the chain lengthdistribution for the entire oil, not just for components below C₆.However, the resolution is not particularly good.

SUMMARY

This summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts that arefurther described below in the detailed description. This summary is notintended to identify key or essential features of the claimed subjectmatter, nor is it intended to be used as an aid in limiting the scope ofthe claimed subject matter.

Illustrative embodiments of the present disclosure are directed to amethod of analyzing a composition of a hydrocarbon-containing fluid. Themethod includes using a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) tool to conductNMR measurements on the hydrocarbon-containing fluid to obtain NMR data.The method further includes using at least one non-NMR tool to conductadditional measurements and to obtain non-NMR data on the fluid. In someembodiments, the non-NMR tool is an optical tool, the additionalmeasurements are optical measurements, and the non-NMR data are opticaldata. An indication of the composition of the fluid, such as chainlength distribution, is determined by using the NMR data. The indicationof the composition of the fluid is normalized using the non-NMR data.

Various embodiments of the present disclosure are also directed to amethod of analyzing a composition of a hydrocarbon-containing formationfluid. The method includes locating a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)tool and at least one additional non-NMR tool downhole in a formation.The hydrocarbon-containing formation fluid is extracted from theformation. The NMR tool is used to conduct downhole NMR measurements andto obtain NMR data on the extracted formation fluid. The additionalnon-NMR tool is used to conduct additional downhole measurements and toobtain non-NMR data on the extracted formation fluid. An indication ofthe composition of the extracted formation fluid is determined by usingthe NMR data. The indication of the composition of the extractedformation fluid is normalized using the non-NMR data.

Illustrative embodiments of the present disclosure are also directed toan apparatus for analyzing a composition of a hydrocarbon-containingformation fluid. The apparatus includes a nuclear magnetic resonance(NMR) borehole tool adapted for use downhole to conduct NMR measurementsdownhole and to obtain NMR data on the hydrocarbon-containing formationfluid. The apparatus also includes a non-NMR borehole tool adapted foruse downhole to conduct non-NMR measurements downhole and to obtainnon-NMR data on the formation fluid. A processor is coupled to the NMRborehole tool and the non-NMR borehole tool. The processor determines anindication of the composition of the formation fluid using the NMR dataand normalizes the indication of the composition using non-NMR data.

Further features and advantages of the subject disclosure will becomemore readily apparent from the following detailed description when takenin conjunction with the accompanying drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The subject disclosure is further described in the detailed descriptionwhich follows, in reference to the noted plurality of drawings by way ofnon-limiting examples of embodiments of the subject disclosure, in whichlike reference numerals represent similar parts throughout the severalviews of the drawings, and wherein:

FIG. 1 is a flow chart of a disclosed method;

FIG. 2 are plots of the chain length distribution of an oil sampleobtained from an optical tool, an NMR tool as weighted according to oneembodiment, and gas chromatography; and

FIG. 3 is an apparatus for implementing disclosed methods.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The particulars shown herein are by way of example and for purposes ofillustrative discussion of the embodiments of the subject disclosure andare presented in the cause of providing what is believed to be the mostuseful and readily understood description of the principles andconceptual aspects of the subject disclosure. In this regard, no attemptis made to show structural details in more detail than is needed for thefundamental understanding of the subject disclosure, the descriptiontaken with the drawings making apparent to those skilled in the art howthe several forms of the subject disclosure may be embodied in practice.

Turning to FIG. 1, a broad method is disclosed. At 10, one or moredownhole fluid analysis logging tools used to extract fluid from aformation and to take measurements on these fluids are placed downhole.At 20, the one or more tools are used to extract fluid from a formation,and at 30, measurements (experiments) on the fluid are conducted. Thesemeasurements include NMR measurements, such as (by way of example)relaxation measurements or diffusion measurements, and at leastadditional non-NMR measurements such as (by way of example) opticalmeasurements, mass density measurements, and viscosity measurements.These different measurements can be made by the same logging tool ordifferent logging tools, but for purposes of the specification andclaims even if a single tool can make both NMR and non-NMR measurementsthat tool will be considered as comprising multiple tools because it hasmultiple functions. At 40, one or more processors located downholeand/or uphole are used to interpret this raw data to obtain quantitiessuch as (by way of example) the NMR magnetization decays, thedistributions of NMR relaxation times and diffusion coefficients,optical spectra and densities, and the density and viscosity of thefluid. At 50, the processor then uses the NMR determinations and theother determinations, such as optical spectra determinations, togetherin order to obtain compositional information or an indication ofcomposition, such as a chain length distribution, mean chain length,weight percent of a component, weight percent of a pseudocomponent(e.g., a combination of components), mole percent of a component, molepercent of a pseudocomponent, gas-to-oil ratio, and/or viscosity.

The NMR tool can measure, but is not restricted to a measurement of NMRdiffusion, NMR longitudinal relaxation (T₁) NMR transverse relaxation(T₂), the dispersion of NMR relaxation, NMR hydrogen index, and highresolution NMR spectroscopy data. The non-NMR tool can measure, but isnot restricted to a measurement of optical density, optical spectra,fluid density, viscosity, temperature, and pressure. In one aspect, asdescribed in detail hereinafter, in addition to conducting an enhancedcompositional analysis, additional information may be obtained, such asthe amount of dissolved gases, such as CO₂, information aboutasphaltenes and biodegradation, and the viscosity of the oil.

In some embodiments, it is assumed that a forward model exists thatallows for the prediction of the distribution of relaxation times ordiffusion coefficients from the composition of the fluid. One example isthe constituent viscosity model in U.S. Pat. No. 6,859,032, and anotheris the previously-described alkane mixture model. A third example is theempirical interpolation scheme described in Anand, V., and Freedman, R.,“New methods for predicting properties of live oils from NMR,” PaperAAAA Proceedings of the 2009 Annual SPWLA Symposium (2009). These modelscan be extended to treat dissolved gases such as carbon dioxide andmethane.

In various embodiments, the resolution and width of the carbon chainlength distribution can be enhanced by combining data from differenttools. For example, the optics data is sensitive to small alkanes suchas C₁ (methane) and C₂ (ethane), but it lumps the composition for hexaneand larger alkanes into one pseudo-component (C₆₊), such that theindividual weight percents of molecules with carbon number 6 and greaterare not determined. The NMR data can give the composition over theentire range of carbon numbers, but the resolution and accuracy is, inmany cases, not as fine as the optics data is for the small carbonnumbers such as C₂ through C₅. As described in more detail below, byusing the optical data to constrain an inversion process that invertsthe NMR data, or by combining the two sets of data in other manners, achain length distribution that has greater resolution and accuracy atlow carbon numbers and also covers a wider range of chain length isachieved.

In other embodiments, data from NMR is combined with data from othertools to enable a determination of the oil composition when the NMR databy itself is insufficient for obtaining chain length distributions. Anexample of this is when there are dissolved gases such as methane andethane in the oil. These gases relax by different processes than therest of the oil. See, Lo, S., et al., “Correlations of NMR relaxationtime with viscosity, diffusivity, and gasoil ratio of methanehydrocarbonmixtures,” Proceedings of the 2000 Annual Technical Conference andExhibition, Society of Petroleum Engineers (October, 2000) and Zhang, Y.et al., “Oil and gas NMR properties: The light and heavy ends,” SPWLA43^(rd) Annual Logging Symposium, Oslo, Japan, Paper HHH (2002) which ishereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety. Because ofthis, in order to obtain chain length distributions from the relaxationdata, it is useful to know the amount of methane and ethane in the oil.By combining the optics data and density data with the NMR relaxationdata, it becomes possible to obtain a more robust, full chain-lengthdistribution.

In further embodiments, data from other tools are combined with the NMRraw data to improve the inversion of the raw data and thereby improvethe accuracy of the chain length distribution derived from the NMR data.In particular, obtaining NMR relaxation and diffusion distributions fromthe magnetization decay involves an inversion process, such as aninverse Laplace transform. There are many solutions for thedistributions that are consistent with the raw data within the toleranceof the noise level. Constraining the solution for the diffusion orrelaxation distributions to be consistent with oil properties, such ascomposition or viscosity derived from other tools, restricts thedistributions to ones that better reflect these physical properties ofthe oil. This, in turn, provides better values for the chain lengthdistributions. In addition, the raw data from the NMR tools can beinverted directly to chain length distributions, and, again, byconstraining the distributions to agree with measurements from othertools, the accuracy of the chain length distributions can be improved.

In one embodiment, the chain length distribution from NMR is combinedwith the composition from an optics tool to enhance the resolution andrange of the final chain length distribution. More particularly, opticaldata from downhole optical tools provides weight fractions for a fewcomponents below C₆ and lumps the additional weight fractions as C₆₊.Essentially, that means that the optical tool provides no detailedinformation above C₅. Similarly but conversely, while NMR measurementsprovide information over a full chain length range, the resolution inthe chain length distribution found by direct methods, in many cases, isquite poor between C₁ and C₆. By combining the different measurements,chain length distributions over a wide range of chain lengths can beobtained with a higher resolution than from either alone.

Information about the composition of the fluid (e.g., chain lengthdistribution) can be normalized using the non-NMR data. The chain lengthdistribution determined from the NMR data is normalized by rescaling thechain length distribution to make the distribution consistent with thenon-NMR data. For example, suppose the weight percents w_(c1), w_(c2-c5)and w_(c6+) have been determined from processing associated with anoptical tool, and the chain length distribution {N_(i),w_(i)} has beendetermined from processing associated with an NMR tool. The optics datacan be delumped according to known techniques to obtain w_(c1), w_(c2),w_(c3), w_(c4), w_(c5) and w_(c6+). For the new distribution, W(N_(i))the values of w_(ci) found from the optics can be kept for carbonnumbers less than 6. The w_(c6+) fraction can then be used to normalizethe components w_(i) for carbon numbers i≧6 from the NMR distribution,to obtain the entire distribution. The new distribution then becomes

$\begin{matrix}{{W\left( N_{i} \right)} = \left\{ \begin{matrix}w_{ci} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \leq 5} \\{w_{i}\frac{w_{c\; 6^{+}}}{\sum\limits_{j \geq 6}\; w_{j}}} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \geq 6.}\end{matrix} \right.} & (11)\end{matrix}$

An example is given in FIG. 2. In this case, the NMR data was taken onthe dead oil (with no dissolved gases), so the NMR distribution(triangles) contains no information (i.e., the mass fraction is set tozero) for C₁ through C₄ and normalized information (based on equation(11)) for carbon chains 5 and larger. The processed (delumped) opticsdata on the live oil (squares) shows the weight percent up to. Thecombined distribution is given by the squares for C₁ through C₅ and bythe triangles for C₆ and above. If desired, the optics and NMR resultscan be averaged or weighted for C₅ as discussed in more detailhereinafter. The combined distribution takes into account the full rangeof carbon numbers measured by gas chromatography (circles) on the liveoil, and as seen in FIG. 2 agrees quite well with the gaschromatography.

In some cases, the data from NMR for some of the shorter chains may alsobe reliable. Then this information can also be included in the finalchain length distribution. For example, if the amount of methane fromNMR, w₁, is considered to be fairly reliable, then the final chainlength distribution can be taken to be

$\begin{matrix}{{W\left( N_{i} \right)} = \left\{ \begin{matrix}{{aw}_{c\; 1} + {\left( {1 - a} \right)w_{1}}} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \leq 5} \\{w_{i}\frac{1 - {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{5}\; {W\left( N_{i} \right)}}}{\sum\limits_{j \geq 6}\; w_{j}}} & {{{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \geq 6},}\end{matrix} \right.} & (12)\end{matrix}$

where a is a measure of the confidence level of the optically determinedw_(c1) versus the NMR-determined w_(i).

A second embodiment involves combining NMR data and data from othertools, such as optical tools, density tools, pressure tools, orviscometers, and inverting the combined data to obtain chain lengthdistributions. The NMR data may include NMR relaxation, NMR diffusiondistributions, or hydrogen index measurements. The additional data fromthe other tools can make it possible to obtain chain lengthdistributions from the NMR data in cases where the inversion of the NMRdata would otherwise be non-unique or the NMR data by itself isinsufficient to determine the chain length distribution. It alsoaugments the range of chain lengths that can be resolved by opticsalone.

It is noted that equations (2) through (5) set forth above for the meanchain lengths and the chain lengths in terms of the diffusion orrelaxation distributions also depend on pressure and temperature. Thus,to obtain the mean chain lengths and the chain length distributions fromNMR measurements, it is useful to combine these measurements withpressure and temperature measurements.

It is also noted that oils often contain dissolved gases such as methaneand ethane. These gases relax via different processes than the largeralkane molecules. As a consequence, they can have the same relaxationtime as larger molecules, such as hexane. This makes the inversionprocess for the chain length distribution from relaxation distributionsnon-unique, unless additional information, such as the amount ofmethane, is known. Often, though, the relaxation measurements are takenwith considerably more resolution than the diffusion measurements. Thismeans that, in principle, they should give much higher quality chainlength distributions, if the issues of the dissolved gases can beresolved, and if there is little to no asphaltene in the oil. In somecases, diffusion measurements are not made. Thus, it is useful to have amethod for calculating the chain length distribution from relaxationtimes.

It is also noted that dissolved carbon dioxide (CO₂) changes the densityand free volume of the oil, and thus influences the diffusioncoefficients and relaxation times of the oil. However, the CO₂ is notdirectly observed by downhole NMR tools. As a result, if there is asubstantial amount of CO₂ in the oil, just applying equations (2)through (5) will not give an accurate chain length distribution. Toproperly account for the effects of CO₂, it is useful to have anindependent measure of CO₂.

With respect to the second embodiment what follows is a detailed examplefor determining the chain length distribution from the relaxation timedistribution when there is a substantial amount of methane in the oil.Other hydrocarbon gases such as ethane can be treated similarly. Fordissolved methane, spin rotation and intermolecular relaxation are thedominant contribution to its relaxation. This is in contrast to mostother alkanes, where intramolecular relaxation is the dominant mode ofrelaxation. A model for these effects can be found in Lo, S., et al.,“Correlations of NMR relaxation time with viscosity, diffusivity, andgasoil ratio of methanehydrocarbon mixtures,” Proceedings of the 2000Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Society of PetroleumEngineers (October, 2000), but other models can be used instead. In theaforementioned Lo, S., et al., reference, the intermolecular relaxationrate T₁ of methane is given by

$\begin{matrix}{{\left( \frac{1}{T_{1}} \right)_{inter} = \frac{32\; \pi^{2}\gamma^{4}\hslash^{2}{I\left( {I + 1} \right)}N\; \rho_{n}\eta}{15{kT}}},} & (13)\end{matrix}$

where γ is the gyromagnetic ratio, h is Planck's constant, I=½ is thespin of the proton, N is the number of spins per molecule, ρ_(n) is thenumber density of molecules, k is Boltzmann's constant, T istemperature, and η is the viscosity of the oil. The viscosity of the oilcan be determined by a viscometer or calculated from the NMR diffusionor relaxation distribution. The product Nρ_(n) is the number of spinsper unit volume, which is equal to the hydrogen index HI. This can bemeasured directly by NMR tools.

The relaxation rate due to spin rotation is

$\begin{matrix}{{\left( \frac{1}{T_{1}} \right)_{SR} = \frac{c_{1}\rho}{T^{c_{2}}}},} & (14)\end{matrix}$

where, in the aforementioned Lo, S., et al. reference, c₁=1.57*10⁵,c₂=1.50 and ρ is the density in g/m³. The total relaxation of methaneT_(1,2 meth) is then given by

$\begin{matrix}{T_{1,{2{meth}}} = {\left\lbrack {\left( \frac{1}{T_{1}} \right)_{inter} + \left( \frac{1}{T_{1}} \right)_{SR}} \right\rbrack^{- 1}.}} & (15)\end{matrix}$

This depends on density, hydrogen index, viscosity and temperature. Thehydrogen index can be measured with NMR tools. The density can bemeasured with a densimeter or can be calculated from pressuremeasurements, and the viscosity can be measured by a viscometer orcalculated from NMR diffusion or relaxation measurements. The downholetemperature is also measured by logging tools.

According to equation (5), the other components of the oil (assuming noother dissolved gases and no asphaltene) have a T₁ and T₂ given by

T _(1,2i) =B N ^(−γ) N _(i) ^(−κ)  (16)

The composition can be found by finding N. One possibility is to use thevalue of N from diffusion measurments. In some wireline tools, thediffusion is not measured with sufficient resolution to obtain a fullchain length distribution, but it can still be used to obtain the meanchain length. It is also possible to solve for the mean chain lengthdirectly from the relaxation data by starting with the 1/κ^(th) momentof T₁ or T₂, which can be expressed in terms of the relaxationdistribution as

$\begin{matrix}{{\langle T^{1/\kappa}\rangle} = {\frac{\int{{f_{T}\left( {\log \; T_{1,2}} \right)}T_{1,2}^{1/\kappa}{{\log \left( T_{1,2} \right)}}}}{\int{{f_{T}\left( {\log \; T_{1,2}} \right)}{{\log \left( T_{1,2} \right)}}}}.}} & (17)\end{matrix}$

In terms of the chain length distribution, this is equivalent to

T ^(1/κ)

=Σp _(i) T _(1,2) ^(1/κ)(N _(i)),  (18)

where p_(i) is the proton fraction, given by

$\begin{matrix}{p_{i} = {\frac{\left( {{2N_{i}} + 2} \right)x_{i}}{\sum{\left( {{2N_{j}} + 2} \right)x_{j}}} = {\frac{\left( {N_{i} + 1} \right)x_{i}}{\overset{\_}{N} + 1}.}}} & (19)\end{matrix}$

In this example, it is assumed that for the components in the oil withi>1, the relaxation time T_(1,2)(N_(i)) is given by equation (16), whilefor i=1 it is equal to T_(1,2meth). Substituting this into equation (18)for the 1/κ^(th) moment of the relaxation time, and rearranging theterms results in

$\begin{matrix}{{\langle T^{1/\kappa}\rangle} = {{\sum\limits_{i \geq 1}{\frac{p_{i}}{N_{i}}B^{1/\kappa}{\overset{\_}{N}}^{\gamma/\kappa}}} - {\frac{p_{1}}{N_{1}}B^{1/\kappa}{\overset{\_}{N}}^{{- \gamma}/\kappa}} + {p_{1}{T_{1,{2{meth}}}^{1/\kappa}.}}}} & (20)\end{matrix}$

Next, equation (19) can be used for p_(i), to express it in terms of themole fraction, x_(i), thus obtaining

$\begin{matrix}{{\langle T^{1/\kappa}\rangle} = {{\frac{\sum\limits_{i \geq 1}{\left( {N_{i} + 1} \right){x_{i}/N_{i}}}}{\overset{\_}{N} + 1}B^{1/\kappa}{\overset{\_}{N}}^{{- \gamma}/\kappa}} - {\frac{2x_{1}}{\overset{\_}{N} + 1}B^{1/\kappa}{\overset{\_}{N}}^{{- \gamma}/\kappa}} + {\frac{2x_{1}}{\overset{\_}{N} + 1}{T_{1,{2{meth}}}^{1/\kappa}.}}}} & (21)\end{matrix}$

The right-hand side of this equation contains the sumΣ_(i≧1)(N_(i)+1)x_(i)/N_(i)=1+Σ_(i≧1)x_(i)/N_(i), The latter sum isconsiderably less than one unless there is a lareg quanitity ofdissolved gas in the oil. In the case, where the only dissolved gas ismethane, it can be approximated by its first term, x₁ resulting in

( N+1)

T ^(1/κ)

=B ^(1/κ) N ^(−γ/κ)(1−x ₁)+2x ₁ T _(1,2meth) ^(1/κ)  (22)

If the weight percent of methane w_(c1) which can be measured by theoptical tools is known, x₁ can be expressed in terms of w_(c1) using theequation

$\begin{matrix}{w_{c\; 1} = {{\frac{{14N_{1}} + 2}{{\sum\limits_{j}{14N_{j}}} + 2}x_{1}} = {\frac{8}{{7\overset{\_}{N}} + 1}{x_{1}.}}}} & (23)\end{matrix}$

This can be substituted into equation (22) to remove x₁. In theresulting equation, the unknown is N, which can be solved fornumerically. Once a solution is obtained for N, then equation (16) givesthe relation between N_(i) and T_(1,2i) for i>1. Equations (7), (8) and(9) can then be used to find the chain length distribution, with onemodification. The weight percent of methane is given by w_(c1). However,the NMR methane signal occurs at T_(1,2meth), and before ƒ(log T_(1/2i))is substituted into equation (7), this extra signal should be subtractedoff. Thus, Eq. (7) is replaced by

ƒ_(N)(log N _(i))=κ└ƒ_(T)(log T _(1,2i))−M ₀ p ₁ g(log(T_(1,2meth))−log(T _(1,2i)))┘.  (24)

where the function g is an approximate delta-function that is peaked atT_(1,2meth)=T_(1,2i) and has an area of one. The magnetization M₀ can befound from the initial magnetization in a T₂ decay. It is also the areaunder the T₂ distribution. Alternatively, it is the zero'th moment ofthe T₂ decay and can be calculated using the Mellin transform.Similarly,

T₂ ^(1/k)

can be calculated from the T₂ distribution or directly from themagnetization decay. See, Venkataramanan L., et al., “Mellin transformof CPMG data,” J. Magn. Reson., 206:20-31 (2010) which is herebyincorporated by reference herein in its entirety.

In other embodiments, the raw data from NMR can be combined with datafrom one or more of optics, density, viscosity and pressure downholemeasurement tools to improve the inversion process for the physicalproperties from the NMR data. One example of this is using results fromtools, such as optics or the viscometer, to constrain the inversions forT₁, T₂ or diffusion to obtain distributions that are consistent withthis other data. More particularly, NMR distributions are obtained usingan inverse Laplace transform of the magnetization decay. However, thisinverse Laplace transform is ill-conditioned, which means that when thesignal has noise, there are many solutions which fit the data. In manycases some constraint, such as smoothness of the distribution, isimposed to restrict the solution to more physical ones.

Once a property of the oil is known, such as its viscosity, η, or theweight percent of methane, w_(c1), this property can be expressed as afunction of the ƒ_(j) and the diffusion coefficients D_(j) or therelaxation times T_(1,2j). Then these known values can be used ascontraints for a minimization as previously described (e.g., thequantity ∥d−Kƒ∥² is minimized using methods such as a non-negative leastsquare fit with Tikhonov regularization or by maximum entropy methods).To illustrate this, consider the example where the viscosity η_(meas)has been measured by some other method. Then, it is possible to solvefor a diffusion distribution for the NMR data that also has a viscosityequal to η_(meas). This can be done by obtaining a diffusion coefficientfrom the NMR data, calculating the viscosity η({ƒ_(j),D_(j)}) for thisdistribution and comparing this calculated viscosity with the measuredviscosity. If the calculated viscosity is very different from themeasured one, the NMR inversion is redone to obtain another distributioniteratively until the calculated viscosity is consistent with themeasured data. Mathematically, this could be done by a joint inversionby minimizing ∥k−Kƒ∥² while satisfying the condition that∥η_(meas)−η({ƒ_(j),D_(j)})∥ is less than the experimental tolerance.Most optimization packages can honor this condition along with the usualpositivity contraint that ƒ_(j)≧0.

It is also possible to constrain the viscosity 77({ƒ_(j),D_(j)}) foundfrom the diffusion distribution according to equation (1) to equal themeasured quantity by minimizing the expression

∥d−Kƒ∥ ²+λ∥η_(meas)−η({ƒ_(j) ,D _(j)})∥²  (25)

where λ is a parameter that reflects how strong the constraint is.Constraining the calculated viscosity to equal the measured viscositycan help improve the inversion process for the diffusion distribution.Once this distribution has been found, it can be used to solve for thechain length distribution, as described above. It should be appreciatedthat this method will also apply to relaxation distributions and otherphysical properties that can be expressed in terms of the diffusiondistributions or relaxation distributions.

In other embodiments, the raw data from a downhole NMR tool is combinedwith data from other downhole tools to invert directly for informationabout the composition. For example, in the case of diffusion, variablescan be chosen as {N_(j),ƒ(N_(j))} instead of {D_(j),ƒ_(j)}. The N_(j)can be linearly spaced, for example N_(j)=j for j=1, 2, 3, . . . , oranother spacing can be chosen. Then the kernel can be defined in termsof these new variables as

K _(ij)({N _(j)})=exp(−b _(i) D(N _(j)))  (26)

where D(N_(j)) is given by equation (10), with the appropriatemodification for methane and ethane. This equation depends on the meanchain length, which, in turn, depends on the entire distribution. Anon-linear minimization can be conducted, where the kernel changes withthe fit, or N can be determined directly from the raw data, usingmethods in previously incorporated Venkataramanan L., et al., “Mellintransform of CPMG data”, J. Magn. Reson., 206:20-31 (2010). In thelatter case, for a given measurement, the kernel is fixed, and theminimization can be linear, apart from the usual non-negativityconstraint. In particular, consider the example where the methane weightpercent w_(c1) is known from optical measurements. The proton number formethane, ƒ(N₁), can be expressed in terms of w_(c1) as follows:

$\begin{matrix}{{{f\left( N_{1} \right)} = {M_{0}\frac{N_{1} + 1}{{7N_{1}} + 1}\frac{{7\overset{\_}{N}} + 1}{\overset{\_}{N} + 1}w_{c\; 1}}},} & (27)\end{matrix}$

where, as in the example above, M₀ and N come from moments of themagnetization decay and can be calculated directly from the raw data. Inthis equation, it is again assumed that a molecule with carbon numberN_(i) has 2N_(i)+2 protons. Depending on the oil, other assumptions canbe made instead. To obtain this equation, use has been made of therelation between the proton number ƒ (N_(i)) and the mole fraction x_(i)given by

$\begin{matrix}{{{f\left( N_{i} \right)} = {{\frac{\left( {{2N_{i}} + 2} \right)x_{i}}{\sum\limits_{j}{\left( {{2N_{j}} + 2} \right)x_{j}}}M_{0}} = {\frac{\left( {{2N_{i}} + 2} \right)x_{i}}{{2\overset{\_}{N}} + 2}M_{0}}}},} & (28)\end{matrix}$

and the relation between the weight percent and the proton number

$\begin{matrix}{w_{ci} = {\frac{\left( {{14N_{i}} + 2} \right)x_{i}}{\sum\limits_{j}{\left( {{14N_{j}} + 2} \right)x_{j}}} = {\frac{\left( {{14N_{i}} + 2} \right)x_{i}}{{14\overset{\_}{N}} + 2}.}}} & (29)\end{matrix}$

Thus, equation (27) can be used to fix the value of ƒ (N_(i)) to thevalue determined by w_(c1), N, and M₀. Then the expression∥d−K({N_(j)})ƒ∥² can be minimized to solve for ƒ(N_(i)) with i≧2, whileholding ƒ(N_(i)) fixed. This minimization can be done using standardnon-negative least squares techniques and regularization schemes such asTikhonov regularization. Alternatively, maximum entropy methods can beused.

Optical data can also be combined with NMR relaxation measurements todetermine fluid composition. For example, a log-linear scaling law canbe used to relate component T2 relaxation time to component chainlength. The scaling law can be used to obtain fluid mixture componentweight fractions from the NMR relaxation measurements. Moreover, opticaldata can be used with the NMR measurements and the scaling law to obtainfurther refined estimates for these component weight fractions. U.S.patent application Ser. No. 14/109,354 filed on Dec. 17, 2013 (AttorneyDocket Number IS 12.3254-US-NP) and referenced above describes thismethod in further detail and is hereby incorporated by reference in itsentirety.

According to one aspect, these methods are not limited to a singlecomponent in the distribution but, instead, can apply to any combinationof components. In addition, if a component such as w_(c1) is known withsome level of uncertainty, and the NMR on its own also can give ƒ(N₁)with some level of uncertainty, instead a constraint can be introducedas in the previous example. This can be done by implementing a jointinversion which minimizes the expression

∥d−K({N _(j)})ƒ∥²  (30)

while satisfying the condition that

∥w ₁ −w _(c1)∥<the experimental tolerance  (31)

where w_(c1) is the measured quantity and w_(l) is calculated fromƒ(N_(j)) according to equation (27). Alternatively, a regularizationtechnique can be used, such as minimizing the expression

∥d−K({N _(j)})ƒ∥² +λ∥w ₁ −w _(c1)∥²  (32)

over the ƒ({N_(j)}). The ƒ(N_(i)) are also constrained to be positive.In the above expression, λ depends on the uncertainty of the twomeasurements, and w₁ can be obtained from ƒ(N_(j)) using equation (27).In this way, by combining information from other tools, the inversionfor chain length from NMR can be improved.

Similar methods can also be used if pseudo-components are determinedfrom the optics. For example, when the weight percent w_(c3-c5) of thepseudo-component C₃₋₅ is measured, this is the sum of the individualweight percents w₃, w₄ and w₅ of C₃, C₄ and C₅. In this case, w₃, w₄ andw₅ can be determined directly from the ƒ (N_(i)) with the help ofequations (28) and (29). Then the expression ∥d−K({N_(j)})ƒ∥² can beminimized with the constraint that w₃+w₄+w₅=w_(c3-c5) The methodsdescribed above can also be used to obtain the chain length distributionfrom relaxation time distributions, if the weight percent of methane andthe density of the oil are known.

In another embodiment, the NMR data can be used to improve fluidcomposition determinations made from the optics data. In particular, ifthere is a small amount of water (under about 5%), and the water andhydrocarbon volumes can be determined from the NMR data, then thesevalues can be used to constrain the estimation of fluid composition fromthe optics data. In one method, different models for two-phase flow canbe applied to the optics data, and the ones that give the accurate waterand hydrocarbon fractions can then be used in determining thehydrocarbon composition from the optics data. The volume fraction ofwater can also be used to constrain the optics data to determine theamount of carbon dioxide in the sample. This information can then beused to improve the determination of the composition of the oil or gasin the sample from the NMR data.

According to one aspect, the previously-described methods can be used toanalyze the composition of a hydrocarbon-containing fluid not onlydownhole, but in a laboratory or uphole at a wellsite. By way ofexample, a hydrocarbon-containing fluid is subject to an NMR relaxationor diffusion experiment in order to obtain NMR relaxation or diffusiondata as well as to a non-NMR experiment such as an optical experiment toobtain non-NMR data such as optical data. The data obtained by thenon-NMR experiment is then used to modify the analysis of the NMR datain determining indications of the composition. By way of example,optical data may be used to constrain an inversion of the NMR data.

According to a further aspect, the previously-described methods can beused in conjunction with single-phase samples (e.g., liquid), andmulti-phase samples (e.g., liquid and gas) including emulsions. Thepreviously-described methods can also be used in conjunction withsamples containing water.

According to another aspect, as seen in FIG. 3, an apparatus 100 isprovided for implementing the previously-described methods. Theapparatus 100 includes a tool string including an NMR borehole tool 110and a non-NMR borehole tool 120, shown located in a borehole 124 of aformation 128, and a processor 130 that is coupled to tools 110 and 120.The NMR borehole tool 110 may be any commercially available NMR tool orany proposed tool capable of conducted NMR measurements downhole. In oneembodiment, the NMR borehole tool 110 is capable of conducting NMRrelaxation and/or diffusion measurements on a hydrocarbon-containingfluid sample. The non-NMR tool 120 may be any commercially availablenon-NMR tool or any proposed tool of conducted non-NMR measurementsdownhole that are useful in modifying an NMR data analysis, e.g., bybeing useful in constraining an inversion of the NMR data. In oneembodiment, the non-NMR tool 120 is a formation tester instrument suchas the CFA™ tool that is capable of optically scanning thehydrocarbon-containing fluid sample that is located in a flowline of thetool. The processor 130, although shown on the surface of formation 128,may be part of either or both of tools 110 and 120 or may be a separateprocessor that may be located downhole or uphole. The processor may be aprogrammed computer, a dedicated processor, a microprocessor, a systemof microprocessors, a digital signal processor (DSP), anapplication-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or other circuitrycapable of analyzing the NMR data obtained by tool 110 in light of thedata obtained by tool 120.

Although only a few example embodiments have been described in detailabove, those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that manymodifications are possible in the example embodiments without materiallydeparting from this disclosure. Accordingly, all such modifications areintended to be included within the scope of this disclosure as definedin the following claims. In the claims, means-plus-function clauses areintended to cover the structures described herein as performing therecited function and not only structural equivalents, but alsoequivalent structures. Thus, although a nail and a screw may not bestructural equivalents in that a nail employs a cylindrical surface tosecure wooden parts together, whereas a screw employs a helical surface,in the environment of fastening wooden parts, a nail and a screw may beequivalent structures. It is the express intention of the applicant notto invoke 35 U.S.C. §112, paragraph 6 for any limitations of any of theclaims herein, except for those in which the claim expressly uses thewords ‘means for’ together with an associated function.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of analyzing a composition of ahydrocarbon-containing fluid, the method comprising: (a) using a nuclearmagnetic resonance (NMR) tool to conduct NMR measurements on thehydrocarbon-containing fluid to obtain NMR data; (b) using at least onenon-NMR tool to conduct additional measurements and to obtain non-NMRdata on the fluid; and (c) determining an indication of the compositionof the fluid by using the NMR data; and (d) normalizing the indicationof the composition of the fluid using the non-NMR data.
 2. A methodaccording to claim 1, wherein the indication of the compositioncomprises a chain length distribution.
 3. A method according to claim 1,wherein the NMR measurements comprise at least one of relaxationmeasurements and diffusion measurements.
 4. A method according to claim3, wherein the NMR data comprise at least one of NMR magnetizationdecays, distributions of NMR relaxation times, and distributions of NMRdiffusion coefficients.
 5. A method according to claim 1, wherein thenon-NMR tool is an optical tool, the additional measurements are opticalmeasurements, and the non-NMR data are optical data.
 6. A methodaccording to claim 5, wherein the optical data comprise at least one ofoptical spectra and optical densities.
 7. A method according to claim 5,wherein the indication of the composition comprises a chain lengthdistribution and the optical data is used to normalize the chain lengthdistribution according to:${W\left( N_{i} \right)} = \left\{ {\begin{matrix}w_{ci} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \leq 5} \\{w_{i}\frac{w_{c\; 6^{+}}}{\sum\limits_{j \geq 6}w_{j}}} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \geq 6}\end{matrix}.} \right.$ where W(N_(i)) is the chain length distribution,i is an index of the number of carbon atoms in a particular component ofthe composition, w_(ci) is a weight percentage for the carbon moleculewith index i, and w_(c6+) is a weight percentage determined according tothe optical data of components having a chain of at least six carbonmolecules.
 8. A method according to claim 5, wherein the indication ofthe composition comprises a chain length distribution and the opticaldata is used to normalize the chain length distribution according to:${W\left( N_{i} \right)} = \left\{ {\begin{matrix}{{aw}_{c\; 1} + {\left( {1 - a} \right)w_{1}}} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \leq 5} \\{w_{i}\frac{1 - {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{5}{W\left( N_{i} \right)}}}{\sum\limits_{j \geq 6}w_{j}}} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \geq 6}\end{matrix},} \right.$ where W(N_(i)) is the chain length distribution,i is an index of the number of carbon atoms in a particular component ofthe composition, w_(ci) is a weight percentage for the carbon moleculewith index i, w₆₊ is a weight percentage determined according to theoptical data of components having a chain of at least six carbonmolecules, and a is measure of confidence level.
 9. A method ofanalyzing a composition of a hydrocarbon-containing formation fluid, themethod comprising: (a) locating a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) tooland at least one additional non-NMR tool downhole in a formation; (b)extracting the hydrocarbon-containing formation fluid from theformation; (c) using the NMR tool to conduct downhole NMR measurementsand obtain NMR data on the extracted formation fluid and using the atleast one additional non-NMR tool to conduct additional downholemeasurements and obtain non-NMR data on the extracted formation fluid;(d) determining an indication of the composition of the extractedformation fluid by using the NMR data; and (e) normalizing theindication of the composition of the extracted formation fluid using thenon-NMR data.
 10. A method according to claim 9, wherein the indicationof the composition comprises a chain length distribution.
 11. A methodaccording to claim 9, wherein the NMR measurements comprise at least oneof relaxation measurements and diffusion measurements.
 12. A methodaccording to claim 11, wherein the NMR data comprise at least one of NMRmagnetization decays, distributions of NMR relaxation times, anddistributions of NMR diffusion coefficients.
 13. A method according toclaim 9, wherein the non-NMR tool is an optical tool, the additionalmeasurements are optical measurements, and the non-NMR data are opticaldata.
 14. A method according to claim 13, wherein the optical datacomprise at least one of optical spectra and optical densities.
 15. Amethod according to claim 13, wherein the indication of the compositioncomprises a chain length distribution and the optical data is used tonormalize the chain length distribution according to:${W\left( N_{i} \right)} = \left\{ {\begin{matrix}w_{ci} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \leq 5} \\{w_{i}\frac{w_{c\; 6^{+}}}{\sum\limits_{j \geq 6}w_{j}}} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \geq 6}\end{matrix}.} \right.$ where W(N_(i)) is the chain length distribution,i is an index of the number of carbon atoms in a particular component ofthe composition, w_(ci) is a weight percentage for the carbon moleculewith index i, and W_(c6+) is a weight percentage determined according tothe optical data of components having a chain of at least six carbonmolecules.
 16. A method according to claim 13, wherein the indication ofthe composition comprises a chain length distribution and the opticaldata is used to normalize the chain length distribution according to:${W\left( N_{i} \right)} = \left\{ {\begin{matrix}{{aw}_{c\; 1} + {\left( {1 - a} \right)w_{1}}} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \leq 5} \\{w_{i}\frac{1 - {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{5}{W\left( N_{i} \right)}}}{\sum\limits_{j \geq 6}w_{j}}} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \geq 6}\end{matrix},} \right.$ where W(N_(i)) is the chain length distribution,i is an index of the number of carbon atoms in a particular component ofthe composition, w_(ci) is a weight percentage for the carbon moleculewith index i, w_(c6+) is a weight percentage determined according to theoptical data of components having a chain of at least six carbonmolecules, and a is measure of confidence level.
 17. An apparatus foranalyzing a composition of a hydrocarbon-containing formation fluid, theapparatus comprising: a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) borehole tooladapted for use downhole to conduct NMR measurements downhole and obtainNMR data on the hydrocarbon-containing formation fluid; a non-NMRborehole tool adapted for use downhole to conduct non-NMR measurementsdownhole and obtain non-NMR data on the formation fluid; a processorcoupled to the NMR borehole tool and the non-NMR borehole tool, whereinthe processor is configured to (i) determine an indication of thecomposition of the formation fluid using the NMR data and (ii) normalizethe indication of the composition using non-NMR data.
 18. An apparatusaccording to claim 17, wherein the non-NMR borehole tool is an opticaltool and the non-NMR data is optical data.
 19. An apparatus according toclaim 17, wherein the indication of the composition comprises a chainlength distribution.
 20. An apparatus according to claim 18, wherein theindication of the composition comprises a chain length distribution andthe optical data is used to normalize the chain length distributionaccording to: ${W\left( N_{i} \right)} = \left\{ {\begin{matrix}w_{ci} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \leq 5} \\{w_{i}\frac{w_{c\; 6^{+}}}{\sum\limits_{j \geq 6}w_{j}}} & {{{for}\mspace{14mu} i} \geq 6}\end{matrix}.} \right.$ where W(N_(i)) is the chain length distribution,i is an index of the number of carbon atoms in a particular component ofthe composition, w_(ci) is a weight percentage for the carbon moleculewith index i, and W_(c6+) is a weight percentage determined according tothe optical data of components having a chain of at least six carbonmolecules.